YOLT is one of the few Bond films that I get tired of watching part of the way through. That's the greatest sin a movie can commit. DAD is entertaining, albeit cringey in places. An easy choice for me.

The first one is a difficult choice. But Diamonds is slihgtly more entertaining in my book. People tend to dislike Hamilton’s 70’s contributions but I quite like how absurd they are.

MR is absurd too, but it goes way too far and it also gets a bit boring at times. Only the special effects and the Bond girl are better, the rest is so far away from what Bond should be, this round goes to DAF.

The second duel is somewhat easier. Maybe Connery’s least impressive entry from the 60’s but Sean in the 60’s still beats most of what came afterwards.

Still though, I’m always astonished by DAD detractors who defend MR. DAD is a 21st Century MR. A film built around outrageous setpieces. Sure MR has better effects, but it really drags sometimes too.

@GoldenGun - How'd you go from saying that DAF vs MR was a "difficult choice" to a "comfortable win for Sean"?

For me, MR had much better chemistry between the main cast, and the villain and Bond girl were infinitely better than those in DAD. The same goes for the score, the theme song, supporting characters, even the sets. I don't think the two are comparable at all. MR's outrageously over-the-top, but for the most part it's done right (I know there's a couple of cringy moments, but it's also genuinely funny in a lot of other areas and always entertaining; I'm not bored at any point, really). Whereas DAD is a farce.

YOLT. Again fairly easily. I don't hate DAD as much as most, but it has nothing on the former. A truly exotic locale, world war inducing plot. The first reveal of Blofeld, plus one of cinema's all time great score's.

DAF just about beats MR for me, I actually think Connery's performance is still pretty good despite his appearance. They were both childhood favourites of mine but DAF has a bit more style and wit that makes it more watchable whereas MR tends to drag for me when I revisit too often.

YOLT easily defeats DAD though, just too many of the classic Bond collaborators doing great work, even if its the weakest of the 60s films.

@GoldenGun - How'd you go from saying that DAF vs MR was a "difficult choice" to a "comfortable win for Sean"?

For me, MR had much better chemistry between the main cast, and the villain and Bond girl were infinitely better than those in DAD. The same goes for the score, the theme song, supporting characters, even the sets. I don't think the two are comparable at all. MR's outrageously over-the-top, but for the most part it's done right (I know there's a couple of cringy moments, but it's also genuinely funny in a lot of other areas and always entertaining; I'm not bored at any point, really). Whereas DAD is a farce.

Given YOLT vs DAD was the last thing I was writing about I must have been giving too much credit for Sean's first win.

Anyway, I still like DAF a tad better than MR. Mr Wint and Mr Kidd are more amusing than any of the MR characters, although Drax is pretty fun too.

I will admit Chiles is better than St. John and the sets and effects are also handled better in MR.

But the score, the theme song and the dialogue go to DAF in my book. MR also goes much further into self-parody territory than DAF. Even though the circus scene is pretty crass, nothing in DAF compares to this:

I can concede on the theme song. Not on the score, though — I think MR has probably the best of all Bond scores! As for dialogue, DAF has some sharp, witty moments but maybe it's the fairly unenthusiastic delivery of them there or the more consistent repartee of wit between Bond and Drax in MR that makes me find latter's dialogue superior.

Yep. Flight Into Space, Bond Lured Into Pyramids, Miss Goodhead Meets Bond (don't think I've ever seen a title theme worked into such a wondrous instrumental), etc. are all out of this world. Even Space Laser Battle is incredible and adds depth and intensity to the otherwise farcical fight.

There is just so much atmosphere in MR, which contributes greatly to how much I like it.

DAF vs. MR
DAF is a very lackluster production, from the acting to the cinematography to the special effects. Moonraker benefits heavily from Gilbert's polished direction, an interesting villain in Drax, and some great special effects.

YOLT vs. DAD
You Only Live Twice is the perfect send-up to the 60's Connery Bond era. Over the top but the previous four films were building up to an epic conclusion that Twice for the most part delivers. Die Another Day doesn't benefit from having the greatest set in the entire series.

As I said in my earlier post on this topic, MR is probably the visual pinnacle of the series (in terms of set design and sheer ambition). The scale is just immense and it's executed with a flair and tone which is bang on the money given the epic out of this world nature of the project. I think it all works beautifully, as long as one views it as a one off Bond spectacle of the highest order, which I do. It's a polar opposite to something like FRWL or DN, which are as scaled back and toned down as can be. It's fitting that many of the old guard like Adam, Lee & Bassey ended their phenomenal runs with this mammoth venture.

As I said in my earlier post on this topic, MR is probably the visual pinnacle of the series (in terms of set design and sheer ambition). The scale is just immense and it's executed with a flair and tone which is bang on the money given the epic out of this world nature of the project. I think it all works beautifully, as long as one views it as a one off Bond spectacle of the highest order, which I do. It's a polar opposite to something like FRWL or DN, which are as scaled back and toned down as can be. It's fitting that many of the old guard like Adam, Lee & Bassey ended their phenomenal runs with this mammoth venture.

Agreed. With FRWL, though, you can tell they had double the DN budget. But DN is very spartan; I would agree the antithesis of MR.

MR vs. DAF - Ultimately a bittersweet call, as I do like DAF for what it is. But MR is the better achievement. Moore at his peak, Tournier's dazzling dream-like cinematography (notably the scene with the dogs chasing Corinne through the forest), Glen's editing which made even the gondola bilge presentable), Barry's best score, and of course Ken Adam's opening the taps up to eleventy.

YOLT vs. DAD - Easily YOLT. A top tier Bond film for me. The story is pap, and Pleasance is ill-suited for Blofeld, but everything else makes up for it just fine. Dare I say it's the best looking and most stylish of the 60s films, as well. It's really the mien of YOLT that pulls me in, the certain look of it that speaks to the grander mood of the thing. Seeing Bond walk around Tokyo in '67 is simply splendid.

Goodhead bothered me from the first time I saw that movie in '79 and that has never changed. Something just smug and phony about her. On the converse I have always had a thing for Tiffany Case (9 years old at the drive-in; loved her in her underwear ).

They're both bad in different ways. Goodhead is plain boring and forgettable with the added smirk of pretending to be an intelligent Bond's equal, although she is clearly not. Tiffany is a tour de force of sassy, vulgar, cheap and brash behavior which leaves a bad taste in your mouth. I even think they rank quite low on the looks level compared with other Bond girls. Someone like Lupe or Goodnight at least stood out on that front.

The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.